But, what I really want you to see in this post is some of the reasons that the CR had to be, and where the SBC would be today if it had not happened.  The ABP is a good place to look when trying to see what the SBC would’ve been.  Look at this article:    http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/5411/53/   and this one:   http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/5410/9/      So, clearly going against the teaching of the Bible does not seem to matter  to these people.  They could care less that the Bible clearly teaches that only men should be Pastors/Elders in a church.  This just shows their total disregard for what the Bible teaches.  They’d rather fit in with society.  And, this is where the SBC was going before the CR.

Also, I’ve always thought that winning souls and worshipping Jesus was at the heart of Christian ministry?  I always thought that fulfilling the Great Commission was at the heart of what a Christian should be about?  I’ve always thought that people knowing God and loving Him would answer the problem of man.  Is that not what the Bible teaches?  But, according to the ABP, the heart of Christian ministry should be something else.  Now, please, dont come in here telling me that I dont believe in helping the sick and the poor.  Of course, Christian compassion should lead us to help people in need, and we’re commanded to do that in the Bible.  But, is this the “heart” of Christian ministry?  Is this the core of what we should be about?  Look at this article:   http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/5410/9/    Also, notice that it’s a woman that’s “preaching” it!  lol.  And again, this is where the SBC was going before the CR. 

Also, the ABP has shown how the liberal/moderate crowd of  the former SBC’ers disregard the clear teachings of the Scripture concerning homosexuality.  Look at this: http://www.abpnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3469&Itemid=9   and this one:  http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/5001/9/  And then, look at this one:   http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/5281/53/  This is where the SBC would be today had not the CR taken place.  This is the way we were going before the CR. 

Folks, we need to thank the Lord that the leaders of the CR had the courage and the faith to lead our SBC back to the Bible.  We need to thank God most of all for doing this great work in the SBC.  God has blessed us in the SBC in great ways.  God is using the SBC in tremendous ways to carry out His work on this Earth.  And, we need to realize that being a people of the BOOK is the reason that God uses us and blesses us so greatly.  The fact that we preach the Gospel and teach His Word is why He continues to choose to bless us and use us.  And, if we ever drift away from a true faith….based on the Bible….then we’ll go the way of the other denominations and churches that left the faith.  You dont have to look far to see how dead and dying these churches and denominations are.

Maybe you haven’t seen this video of a young man making this poetic “speech” about being sorry for being a Christian.  He even uses the F word a couple of times in his “poem.”  It makes you wonder why he felt the need to use the F word in a poem, where he was going after Christians and others for all the ills of Christendom that he sees.  You can see his “poem” on this site  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EieFdXy_HwM on youtube.  I warn you now that he has a potty mouth, and he uses the F word.  But, he recites this “poem” to the jeers of the crowd.  They’re especially happy, and you can hear the laughter, when he apologizes right off the bat for being a Christian.

Well, I’m not sorry for being a Christian.  I’m not sorry for calling sin what it is…sin.  I’m not sorry for saying that sin will be judged by God.  Why am I not sorry?  Because a lost man’s sins will be judged by God.  And, the lost crowd needs to hear that.  How can a lost man be saved, until he sees his need of a Savior?  He cant.  So, why would I apologize for calling sin what it is, and for telling people that God is not happy with our sins?  I know that some lost people will call that intolerance, and they’ll think it’s mean and narrow; but it’s the truth.  The truth shall set you free.

Also, I’m sad about the loss of life at the hands of the Crusaders and the Catholic Church.  But, why should I apologize for the Crusades that happened hundreds of years ago.  I wasnt there.  I didn’t do it.  So, why should I apologize for something that happened hundreds of years ago.  Why, it wasn’t even my Church that did this thing.  It wasn’t a Southern Baptist Church.  It wasn’t any Churches that came out of the Reformation.  So, why should I, a 48 year old Believer, apologize  for something that some misguided people did a long time ago?  Why would any Christian feel the need to bring this up and apologize for it?  Why would this make anyone be sorry that they’re a Christian.  I’m not sorry that I’m a Christ Follower, just because of what some knights did back in the dark ages.

BTW, while we should love gay people, I’m certainly not sorry for calling homosexuality what it is.  It is sin.  It is sin that God will judge.  Now,  I know that God will also judge the adulterers and the liars and the thieves and all other sinners.  But, this young man seems to be saying that he’s sorry for calling homosexuality a sin.  Well, young man, it is a sin.  And, those people, who die in this sin, will go to Hell.  They need to be saved, and I do pray that they’ll be saved and go to Heaven.  I love gay people.  I do not hate gay people.  I wish that everyone of them would get saved today.  I certainly hope that I get to spend eternity with all the gay people in this world, because they repented and put their faith in Jesus.  I really do.  But, should I apologize for calling homosexual sex what it is?  A sin.  Never.

Also, I hate that there are homeless people, and I really hate that some men beat their wives.  I wish every homeless person had a home, and I wish that every wife beater would have to spend 30 minutes with CB Scott in a locked room by themselves.  But, you know what?  There will always be homeless people. Jesus said that the poor will always be here. And, some people are homeless because of the bad choices they’ve made in life, and people will continue to make bad choices, and do things like drink alcohol, use drugs, gamble, etc.  And, these choices will cause them and their family to suffer financially, and in many other ways.  Why should I, as a Christ Follower, apologize for the homeless?  I didn’t make them that way, nor can we give them all a home.  Some of them dont even want a home!  Also, why should I apologize and be sorry that I’m a Christian, because of what some drunken, mean man did to his wife?  Christians didn’t make this man into a wife beater.  Christians cant stop men from being wife beaters.  There will always be mean, ornery men out there, who will beat women and children.  That’s just a sad fact of life, and a result of the fall of man.  So, why would this make me be sorry for being a Christian?  I don’t get it.

Also, what Indian tribe was wiped out in the name of the Church?  I thought it was done, because white men wanted the land.  Some of it was done, because white men thought that gold was on the land that the Indians claimed belonged to them.  Why bring the Church into this?  Was General Custer a Christian attacking Indian tribes for some Church?  I mean, really; is some school out there teaching young people that the Church wiped out Indian tribes in America?

As I listened to this video, I was also left wondering if all Christendom should be blamed for the child abuse that has happened in  some Churches?  I was left wondering if preaching the Gospel was something that a Christian should apologize for?  And, did Christians bring in the plague?  Really?  And, maybe he doesn’t know about all the 15 year old girls and others that have been helped by all of the Christian pregnancy centers and Christian counselors that have helped women deal with the awful affects of abortion? Another thing, did Christians start wars between the nations?  Did Christians start WW I; WW II; or the Gulf War?  I don’t recall Dr. R. G. Lee declaring war on Germany.  I don’t recall Dr. A. T. Robertson declaring war on Japan.  Do yall?  What’s this guy talking about in this poem?  Why would anyone say that this poem is something that needed to be heard by all Christ Followers?  What’s the point of this young man’s poem?

This poem reminds me of my college days, where we had some flaky people floating around, who were anti-Church.  You know the types.  They don’t belong to a Church.  They don’t like to commit to anything.  They’d rather show up at a college, Bible study group every now and then; but they don’t get into commitment.  They’re unsound in their doctrine, and they really don’t like for anyone to help them understand the Bible better.  They’d rather complain and whine about all the bad things that they see in their minds about the Church.  Every thing is looked at thru negative glasses concerning the Church and sound doctrine.  I saw many young people on my college campus, back in my college days, who were just flaky and out there, in deep center field, on the fringe, who just saw everything negatively.  Everything was bad, and they were the ones, who could fix it, of course.

Well, I’m glad to be a Christian.  When I look at how most of the hospitals and orphanages in our world were started by Christians, I rejoice.  When I look at all the institutions of higher learning that Christians started, I rejoice.  When I look at all the people who’ve been helped by Churches and Pastors and Christian counselors, then I rejoice.  When I look at all the millions of people, who’ve been saved thru the years, by the witness of Christians and missionaries, I rejoice.  When I look at all the people, who have been ministered to by the prayers of faithful Christian people, I rejoice.  When I look at all the marriages that have been not only helped, but saved, due to the grace of God coming thru a Pastor’s sermons and counsel and prayers and encouragement, then I rejoice that I’m a Christian.  When I look at the people, who were at the brink of suicide, but some Christian helped them find hope in the Lord Jesus, then I rejoice.  When I think of the disaster relief teams that go out in the name of Jesus from SB Churches, and they help people in incredible, heartbreaking disasters, then I rejoice.  When I think about all the people that have been fed, their electric bills paid, their water bills paid, clothes bought, etc. ; paid  by Churches all over the USA and the world, then I rejoice.  And, I’m talking about every week, SB Churches in little towns and big cities all across this land, helping people keep the lights and the heat on; feeding children, etc.; then I rejoice.

I’m not sorry for being a Christian.  I’m thrilled to be a Christ Follower.  I’m excited about being a child of God.  I’m ecstatic about what God is doing thru the Church.  I’m delighted that God uses Christians to do so much good in our world.  Sorry?  Apologize?  Why?  Why should we apologize for being a Christian?  Aren’t you glad to be Christian?

You can listen to the podcast right from the site using the player below, or, as many folks have done, subscribe to our podcast in iTunes and have it downloaded immediately when it becomes available each week. Click the podcast image in this post or the link in the sidebar to be taken to our iTunes page, and while you’re there, give us a rating and/or a review. We’d appreciate feedback, which you can put in a review there, or in a comment here. Let us know how we can improve the podcast.

Below are some links to the items we discussed in this episode. See you next week on the podcast.

• Trevin Wax’s blog discussion with Romanian Baptist leaders
• Oklahoma’s ultrasound law struck down
• Tornado warnings
• Richard Dawkins equating evolution skeptics with holocaust deniers
• Southwestern prof resigns to retain membership in Broadway Baptist Church
• National health care as moral concern

Below is a post from guest contributor Tim Guthrie. Tim is Senior Pastor of Arlington Baptist Church in Knoxville Tennessee. To comment on this post, you can go to Tim’s blog here.

USA Today ran an article by Jonathan Merritt exposing his own views (not those of the norm in SBC life) related to homosexuality. Though Merritt, the son of SBC Pastor James Merritt and Liberty Grad (of which I am) presents his heart for loving people, he also reveals a dangerous view of Biblical understanding and application.

I do not question his heart. I do question several things in the article and I also question his use of “title” in describing who he is and what he does which I will explain later.

Issues that need to be addressed:

1. He seems to think that LOVE should cause us to defend the normalization of the homosexual agenda. He writes “As Christians, we clearly won’t be able to support any and everything. For example, our biblical convictions prohibit a redefinition of marriage. Yet, there are other areas where we may be able to offer support. We should support protecting our gay and lesbian neighbors from discrimination in the workplace and cleaning up the legal cobwebs that govern hospital visitation rights and inheritance for same-sex couples. ”

The above statement is contradictory at best. We cannot redefine but we can normalize which is redefining.

2. He seems to have a limited view of Biblical Law and application of such. Again he writes “Scripture says the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law, gives life. A spirit of love in public policy is one that all Christians can support.”

Maybe he has forgotten that it is whole of the law that gives life in the fact that Jesus fullfilled all of it on our behalf. Jesus did not negate it.

3. He seems to equate our command to love with a mandate to “affirm or endorse”. He writes “Our assertions that we love our neighbors must be accompanied by visible expressions of that love. Therefore, we need to begin looking for ways to affirm, rather than undermine, our claims to love our gay neighbors.”

Maybe Jonathan has forgotten or never heard his father preach on “tough love”. Though he quotes I Corinthians 13 for the phrases that fit his desired presentation, he leaves out words from that chapter such as:

1 Corinthians 13:5-6
5 does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil;
6 does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth…

Add to this that Jonathan’s father has been clear in what the Bible teaches about homosexuality and how we should stand for what God says is right and yet love the sinner. In fact, I remember specifically hearing him state that “our loving people must never be used to compromise the TRUTH of God’s Word!”

And finally, I completely dislike the whole way that Jonathan is tagged as the writer of the article. At the end of the article appear these words:
“Jonathan Merritt is a faith and culture writer who serves as national spokesperson for the Southern Baptist Environment and Climate Initiative.”

Nothing is mentioned of the fact that Jonathan has NO position within the structure of the SBC. The appearance is left to allow anyone who does not know SBC details to think that this Initiative is indeed an actual SBC Initiative. It further leaves the impression that Jonathan is the spokesperson for such.

He is NOT! Period.

But then I discovered that his views actually run in line with those of the ACLU. Read the following:
“The American Civil Liberties Union is threatening to sue Tennessee public school officials if they do not stop restricting students’ access to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Web sites on school computers.

Tennessee schools are connected to a statewide computer network that uses filtering software that groups Web sites into different categories, eSchoolNews.com reports. Local school officials have the ability to block or unblock those categories.

In a letter dated April 15, the ACLU said as many as 80 percent of public school districts in the state might be blocking access to non-sexual sites that offer educational and political information about issues like gay marriage.

The letter alleges the software blocks all sites designed as such by default. Federal and state laws only require schools to use filtering software to restrict obscene or harmful information.
The ACLU demands the schools have a plan to restore access to sites designated as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender for the 2009-10 academic year by April 29, eSchoolNews.com reports.”

So if I follow the reasoning of Jonathan Merritt, I would be wrong in encouraging as a parent, Pastor, and more importantly a Christian, that the state and local authorities ignore the ACLU. In fact, I am writing to encourage them to fight the ACLU on this.

We are quickly seeing the rise of a movement that seeks to change perception more than it seeks to live in Holiness and Lordship surrender to Christ. It seems that some need the public perception more than they need the blessings of their God.

Wes Kenney over at SBCToday.com sums up this whole issue quite well when he says:
“As Jonathan Merritt is my brother in Christ, I love the “spinner” who wrote this article. I’m just not terribly fond of his “spin.”"

Maybe it would helpful for all of us to look to the courage of Miss California. In front of a television audience with the dream and goal of her life at stake, she stood true to her Lord and His Word.

May we all!

I was never a great player, mainly because I was never able to generate enough power without spinning the handle, and spinning, in real competitive foosball, is strictly verboten.  There was even a catchy saying in the foosball community at this private Christian college: “Hate the spin, but love the spinner.” It is much easier to slam the ball into the back of the goal when you spin, but the truly talented players can fire unbelievably powerful shots just by the action of their wrists. They don’t need to spin in order to be effective.

On April 20, USA Today published an essay by Jonathan Merritt. Merritt, 26, is a recent graduate of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, and according to the footnote of his essay, he works as a faith and culture writer. The article is titled “An Evangelical’s Plea: ‘Love the Sinner’,” and it is a call for Christians to reach out in love to the gays and lesbians around us, and to do so in tangible ways. This is a worthy point to make, and a call that all of us who name the name of Christ ought to heed. But in making the point, Merritt makes use of quite a lot of rhetorical “spin,” enough to make me want to dust off that old catch phrase I learned around the foosball tables at JBU.

Some of this “spin” can be found in his opening paragraphs, where he provides examples of quotes that he has mined from the internet in an attempt to demonstrate that evangelicals prefer to display their hatred for sin. To characterize the late Dr. D. James Kennedy as a “fundamentalist televangelist” can only serve to inflame and prejudice USA Today readers, who may be unfamiliar with his life and ministry, against anything he might have said. Some of the statements he quotes are indefensible, but some, given their proper context, might be entirely appropriate. His quote-mining “spin” can only serve to confuse the issue and it paints with too broad a brush.

Another example of “spin” being employed by Mr. Merritt is in his use of statistics. He cites a Barna Research Group study which found that 80% of non-Christians ages 16-29 describe Christians as “confusing” on this issue. He then suggests that this is perhaps because “many recognize the difference between the life of Jesus Christ and the lives of those who claim to follow him.” This is quite a leap, and I can’t imagine what it is intended to suggest, if not that we ought to look to the opinions of the young non-Christians around us rather than to the scriptures when evaluating our degree of faithfulness to Christ.

But perhaps most disturbing in Merritt’s essay is his seeming willingness to compromise biblical definitions of sin and salvation. In discussing the marriage debate, he rightly states, “our biblical convictions prohibit a redefinition of marriage.” But he then goes on to suggest “other areas” where we might be able to compromise, such as offering support for anti-discrimination measures in the workplace and in reducing legal impediments to inheritance and hospital visitation rights for same-sex couples.

Let me be clear: I do not believe that it is a sin to be tempted by homosexual desires. I am convinced, however, because the Bible is very clear, that homosexual behavior is sinful. I will leave to others the debate over whether it is a chosen lifestyle or an inborn reality. That debate makes not one bit of difference to me. What scripture condemns is homosexual behavior.

Having said that, I am curious as to whether there are any other sins Mr. Merritt would be in favor of legislating in order to make their commission more acceptable in our society. It sounds very compassionate to advocate for these rights; it might even make one feel as if they are “showing love” to gays and lesbians in a way that is “concrete and tangible.” But what it is, in fact, is simply more terribly naïve “spin.”

The person who is enslaved to the sin of homosexuality does not need Christians to express love to them by making their sin easier to commit. Rather, they need Christians who will love them enough to come alongside them and show them their desperate need for a relationship with the One who can forgive them and restore them to a right relationship with their Creator.

I am convinced, however, that Mr. Merritt’s most egregious spin is contained in a paragraph in which he discusses marriage.  It contains concepts that are, I believe, harmful to the Gospel itself. Merritt states:

“God’s model is a lifelong, monogamous, heterosexual union, but we must balance this message with the scriptural understanding that we are all sinners. Individuals who have decided to follow Christ have not ceased to be sinners; we are simply sinners who have taken advantage of God’s gracious gift of salvation.”

This paragraph only tells part of the Gospel story, and the part it leaves out is absolutely essential to this discussion. In John’s first epistle, he writes, “No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God.” (1 John 3:9 ESV)

Merritt’s presentation of “God’s gracious gift of salvation” in the paragraph quoted above makes it sound as though a sinner can hold to Christ while simultaneously holding to a habitual sin. This is not only false, but it is dangerously misleading, and offers false hope to those who wish to believe that their anti-biblical lifestyle can somehow be compatible with saving faith. God’s Word is clear: It cannot.

Mr. Merritt has many good points to make. And I have no doubt he possess the necessary intellect and skill with the language in order to be effective in making them. In this essay, however, it seems that he has relied more upon spin, a spin with potentially dangerous consequences.

Yes, I believe the phrase I learned during my misspent youth in Northwest Arkansas applies here. As Jonathan Merritt is my brother in Christ, I love the “spinner” who wrote this article. I’m just not terribly fond of his “spin.”

This article also available and open to comments at the semi-abandoned weskenney.net.

Historically when institutions and individuals back away from convictional biblical truth, it is driven primarily by one single factor — and that is the respectability of other people. In other words, much more caring about what other people think about them than what God thinks about them,

I don’t know if this is the case with Warren, but I am disappointed in his recent shuffle away from supporting Proposition 8.

The most important thing happening in SBC current events right now is the Executive Committee’s consideration of whether Broadway Baptist Church, Fort Worth, TX, is or is not in “friendly cooperation” with the Southern Baptist Convention. Why do I believe this to be the most important thing presently ongoing in the SBC?

Do I believe that this case is important because homosexuality is the most important issue presently facing our convention? No. The SBC’s answer to the question of homosexuality is, for the moment, clear. We’ll see where it stands one generation from now, with researcher after researcher declaring an upcoming generation of “evangelicals” who are “more tolerant on issues such as gay rights and homosexuality” (John Turner, quoted in Christianity Today online article here). But I think we have reason to hope that the Southern Baptist Convention is distinct enough from evangelicalism at large to stick with the Bible while evangelicalism slides off into public relations. Whatever. But my point here simply is that the SBC, before showing Broadway Baptist Church the door, is already sufficiently on-the-record on the question of homosexuality.

Homosexuality is an important issue, but not nearly the most important issue facing us at present. But there are issues involved in this case that are very important for Southern Baptists.

Biblical Church Discipline and Regenerate Church Membership are among them. The very heart of this case is the idea that Broadway Baptist Church is responsible for those whom it admits into membership. Reports indicate that one of the most important questions posed in the last EC meeting simply asked Broadway’s representatives something along the lines of, “If you knew for certain that a person seeking membership were an ongoing, active, unrepentant homosexual, would you still receive that person into membership?” It is a good question, and the committee did not receive a good answer, to my knowledge.

Broadway’s defense, up to this point, has been that it has never taken any sort of a vote to place the church in favor of homosexuality. Unless it does something like that, Broadway’s representatives argue, it has not “act[ed] to affirm, approve, or endorse homosexual behavior.” (SBC Constitution, Article III). I’m hoping that the Executive Committee is preparing to decide that a church is indeed acting to affirm, approve, or endorse behavior when (a) the church knows full well that its members are engaged in that behavior, and yet (b) no disciplinary action whatsoever is taken by the church with regard to that behavior—no preaching, no formal disciplinary action, not even any passing over such a one for positions of responsibility in the congregation.

I believe that this action, if taken, will be an important milestone in our needed strengthening of biblical ecclesiology within our convention. It will be a clarion call to our churches to remember that membership does matter and that we are indeed responsible for the spiritual health of all of those who are members in our congregation. Particularly this is true for those of us in church leadership “who will give an account” (Hebrews 13:17) for these folks. At least with regard to homosexuality, the message from our convention will be clear: Loving and redemptive discipline toward known practicing homosexuals in the church is the only biblical option for our churches.

That lesson, once learned with regard to homosexuality, needs to be extrapolated to a great many public and grievous sins that muddle our testimony of Christ, weaken our evangelistic effectiveness, and diminish the holiness of the Bride of Christ.

And that brings us to the final reason why this is the most important thing happening right now in the Southern Baptist Convention: Because this question is all about the local church. We’ve had a Conservative Resurgence among our national institutions. Similar things need to happen in some of our state conventions. Discussions are underway regarding a Great Commission Resurgence to serve as extension and successor to the Conservative Resurgence. These are all good things. But none of them are the thing that we need most.

What we need is a Local Church Reformation, fomented by Personal Revival for some, and Regeneration for others. To the degree that the case of Broadway Baptist Church reminds us about how profound is the need for reformation and revival in our churches, this is a good thing—indeed, it is the most important thing happening right now in the Southern Baptist Convention.

UPDATE: As it so happens, the good folks over at BaptistTheology.org have just posted an article by Dr. Gary Ledbetter entitled “Is There a Church within Your Church?” I just read the article and I see that it addresses some of the same points that I have addressed in this blog post. The major difference is that Gary’s article is so much better written.

It would seem that all of these organizations are on the same page. “Unfair” you might say…well…

The Associated Baptist Press – which on their website admits to a tangential (read that as foundational) association with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship – has recently published a series of articles by Mercer University professor Dr. David Gushee discussing the issue of homosexuality and our attitude/response as Christians and Baptists. These articles are:

OPINION: On Homosexuality, Can We at Least Talk About It? (March 27, 2008)

OPINION: On Homosexuality, Whose Narrative Do We Believe (May 1, 2008)

OPINION: The Path to Discernment on Homosexuality (July 16, 2008)

You might be thinking, ‘OK, that’s enough,’ BUT no! Two more articles, conveniently circumscribed with the “OPINION” disclaimer–much like the one the CBF used as a “get out of jail free” card with Dr. Killinger whom they invited to be one of the speakers at their little conclave in Memphis this summer (curiously, our Missouri CBF paper had no report even mentioning the name of that renowned “theologian”)–have appeared from differing authors, one from which I am certain they wish to distance themselves…

OPINION: No True Compassion Apart from Revelation – Dr. George Guthrie (August 13, 2008)
[He is a Bible Professor at Union University, Jackson, TN]

OPINION: Gay Christians Can’t Wait Any Longer – Peggy Campolo (August 13, 2008)
[Yes, she is the wife of Author/Speaker Dr. Tony Campolo]

Now, as I have stated, the ABP has given itself the “the opinions expressed by our guest editorial writers do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff or management (CBF) of ABP News” escape clause. This does not settle the issue. Simple accounting of articles written gives a 4:1 ratio in favor of the accomodationists’ mindset over the biblicists’ mindset. It is that accomodationist mindset which LGBT advocates are seeking to push into our churches.

I understand that we could have it out right here over the theological underpinnings of various world views…and maybe that should happen. Obviously I am aggravated by the ABP & CBF lack of forthrightness and consistency regarding the issue of homosexuality. I am also grieved that someone like Dr. Guthrie will likely be demonized for his expression of biblical compassion in this discussion. I whole-heartedly agree with his perspective on this matter…and this is not an academic exercise for me.

Within my extended family, I have had to deal with a family member who has chosen the homosexual life style. The road which I have traveled down regarding this issue has not been an easy one. It has been filled with tension, arguments, challenges, hurts, and frustration.

Let me state right now that I am completely convinced, on the basis of Scripture alone, that homosexual behavior is a sin. I see no other viable theological argument to contradict that conviction. I am well aware, having dealt with discussions with this family member of mine, of the various arguments in the pro-gay theology perspective. Like Dr. Guthrie (and Joe Dallas, see his detailed discussion here), I find the arguments to be siginifcantly lacking in hermeneutical support of the homosexual lifestyle.

Let me also state that this confrontation has also caused me to open my eyes to wrong, sinful approaches to this issue in my own life. For instance, I had found that the easiest way for me to be certain to communicate to family and friends that I was not nor ever will be gay was to be certain to be either caustic or sarcastic in my description of homosexuals (and in the right context to be certain to throw in the right pejorative slang..such as queer or fag…as needed). At this point let me illustrate what God showed me from a pastor’s perspective. Let’s suppose that a solid, Christian couple has a 24 year old daughter who has chosen the lesbian lifestyle. They are in agony over this situation but have yet to speak to anyone about it. They come to church one Sunday morning for Sunday School and are really needing to open up about their situation. During the course of the class Bible study, the teacher makes some sarcastic remark disparaging “those queers” and the majority of the class chuckles in agreement. Unfortunately, the door has just been slammed in their face. How could anyone feel comfortable about reaching out for ministry, compassion, and support in that environment?? I know that has happened…and unfortunately might happen all too often in some churches. In these actions, we as God’s people have sinned and fallen woefully short of who we should be as followers of Christ.

I have learned and have hopefully been changed in my approach to ministry in this area. My change in relationship to the issue of homosexuality did not necessitate my acquiescence to acceptance of sin in order to be seen as compassionate or relevant regarding this issue.

As Christians, and Baptists, we must always line our lives up with Scripture. What God calls righteous, we must call righteous. What God calls sin, we must call sin. Homosexual behavior is sin. It is unacceptable in the life of a Christian–just as is lying and adultery, etc. We must also keep every door to ministry open. In our ministries, individuals struggling with homosexuality ought to be welcome to attend our churches…we have the True answers they need, and if they are seeking a way out, we must help them. Conversely, someone who openly advocates and lives that lifestyle would never be a candidate for membership, and certainly not leadership, in our church. If someone were to come into our church and attempt to ‘stir things up’ regarding this issue, they would be asked to leave…I believe that to be a primary responsibility I have in overseeing the ministry of our church.

When we walk in Jesus’ steps, following the will and way of our Lord, fulfilling the ministries he has given us as His children, we will walk through troubled waters. We must remain constant in our stands against sin and in the offer of grace, mercy, and redemption to all.

Recently Broadway Baptist of Ft. Worth voted to not have pictures of families in their directory because some of the “families” were homosexual couples.  You can read about the debate and the vote of the congregation here.

How did this historic church that is known for its music come to debating if homosexuals would be represented in their directory?  According to their web site, they have had a string of pastors who led the church to liberal views and practices.

John Rowan Claypool, 1971-1976 was the pastor that “ordained a woman to be a minister, the first by any church affiliated with the Baptist General Convention of Texas and only the ninth in the Southern Baptist Convention.”

Later, C. Welton Gaddy, 1977-1983 “was one of three Baptist preachers who attended a meeting in Gatlinburg, Tennesee, called by Cecil Sherman out of concern about the attempted takeover by the Paul Pressler and Paige Patterson of the Southern Baptist Convention.”

The next pastor was the man who organized the aforementioned meeting, Cecil E. Sherman, 1985-1992.  “He was in the forefront of the organizing of Cooperative Baptist Fellowship and became that organization’s first executive head in 1992.”

H. Stephen Shoemaker, served from 1992-1999 until he took the pastorate at Myers Park Baptist Church, Charlotte, North Carolina.  You might remember the homosexual controversy of Myers Park from this article that reported, “The Executive Committee of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina ruled Nov. 12 that the church was not in compliance with membership articles. While convention messengers voted overwhelmingly to hear the Myers Park appeal the next day, they voted similarly to reject it.”

In 2001, they received Brett Younger as their current pastor.  Younger made this statement about the current controversy: “If we look into the eyes of a gay Christian, we may have to rethink some of our opinions.” 

I agree with Younger.  Broadway Baptist does need to rethink some of their opinions, first being the idea that a person can be a “gay Christian.” Such a statement is akin to saying “dark light” or “depraved saint,” and is an unworthy utterance from any Christian’s lips.

What caused the church to come to this point?  In my opinion they had a consistent stream of liberal leadership that desired to become more like the world than being salt and light of God’s Word.

Broadway Baptist Church is an example of why I rejoice that God raised leaders in the SBC to bring us back to our conservative roots.  I personally believe if the Claypool’s, Gaddy’s, Sherman’s, and Shoemakers had their way, we could very well be debating homosexuality within the convention.  But God raised men like Paige Patterson, Jerry Vines, Adrian Rogers, Al Mohler, and others who took hits from the liberals to lead our convention back to her conservative roots.

Two points I would like to make concerning Broadway Baptist.  First, has the Executive Committee looked into this situation with a recommendation in Indianapolis to remove fellowship from this church if they still belong to the SBC?

Second, this is a very precarious situation.  No matter what the church chooses (other than removing from fellowship those practicing homosexuality) they are still redefining the family.  To print a picture in a church directory of two homosexual men or women as a family redefines the family contrary to the biblical witness.  Also, to refrain from printing family pictures of a husband/wife/children, husband/wife, single parent/children or single person in favor of group pictures diminishes the importance of families in the local church.  Either way, unless they follow the biblical mandate to remove those practicing what God considers an abomination, they are redefining the family.

I hope the executive committee is looking into this situation and preparing recommendations to the SBC when she meets in Indianapolis. I also hope that Broadway Baptist will take a stand for God, with love, and discipline those members so that they realize their sin and turn from it.